On Tuesday, the Campaign against Climate Change joined others outside the International Maritime Organization, at the start of crucial negotiations to determine how (and whether) shipping carbon emissions will be cut. If the shipping industry were a country, it would be sixth in the list of carbon polluters, between Germany and Japan. But because the Paris climate agreement is based on nationally determined contributions from member countries, as yet it has no specific obligations to cut carbon. If shipping emissions continued to grow, it could be 17% (almost a fifth) of the world’s total emissions by 2050.

The Marshall Islands have proposed that the IMO should aim for zero emissions by 2035 while a group of EU, Pacific countries and NGOs are arguing for at least 70% (and aiming for 100%) by 2050. But Brazil and some other countries oppose any absolute cap on carbon emissions, and others are arguing for a weak compromise deal not compatible with the Paris climate agreement.

Ship stewards welcomed delegates aboard the 'Good Ship Paris', handing out boarding cards with instructions 'for your comfort and climate safety', while on the other side of the Thames, someone had cleaned sections of the wall to reveal a message: "IMO Don't Sink Paris".

The Transport Select Committee recently released their report on the government's plans to build a third runway at Heathrow. If you read the report in full, it is clear why this plan is completely incompatible with our climate obligations. Yet carbon budgets are given the briefest of mentions in the summary, and crucial issues tucked away in the ninth and final annex to the report, entitled 'Carbon'. Unsurprisingly, media coverage focused on those issues which were given more prominence, including air pollution, noise and public transport limitations.

But the committee's evidence-gathering can shine a light on some of the more extraordinary 'assumptions' being used by the government in its calculations around climate impact. These 'assumptions' are being used to avoid discussion of the damaging impact a third Heathrow runway would have on our climate targets, keeping MPs in the dark in the run up to this summer's Parliamentary vote on the scheme.

UPDATE: COURT DATE 20 MARCH

"On 20th March we have our first Court hearing - we must persuade the Court we have an arguable case that merits a full hearing. We are confident that once the Court understand that our governments inaction on climate change is based on a mistake, our case will proceed to a formal hearing. While we expect to be successful with this, in theory this could be our only Court hearing, so we must make the most of it. Permission hearings usually take place at 10am or 10.30 am, but we won't know the precise time or Court number until the afternoon of 19 March. So, whatever the time of the Court hearing we're going to stage a solidarity event outside the Royal Courts of Justice between 9am and 10am."

Facebook event